Thank you so much. Thank you. Wonderful to be
here with you tonight. Thank you so much.

I am greatly thrilled to be here tonight with
Tony Perkins and Dr. James Dobson, and so many others -- because I believe that
tonight is the start of something really important. I think this is about the
people of God, evangelical Christians, beginning to understand what our
responsibility really is.

Now this is a little unusual for our church on
a Sunday night. There are a lot of other churches gathering with us, and this
isn't what we do most Sunday nights. Why? It is because this is a gospel church.
This is a church that is established upon the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. Our
main message is salvation through grace alone, by faith alone, through Christ
alone. The main message we want to communicate is that we want to see all
persons come to know the Lord Jesus Christ as Savior. We want to communicate to
all that we that we are not calling for persons merely to be moral; we want them
to be believers in the Lord Jesus Christ, because we don't just need instruction
-- we need salvation.

Now, because of that, something has to explain
why we would take this time on a Sunday night to talk about something like the
federal judiciary. I want to make clear why there is such a sense of urgency
that we would do this. It's because so much that is precious to us, so much that
is essential to this civilization, this culture, this great democratic republic,
is in the hands of the courts. And we know that means that much is at risk,
because we've been watching, and we've been learning.

For far too long,
Christians have been concerned to elect the right people to office, and then
go back home. We've learned the importance of the electoral process, and yet
we're also discovering that the third branch of government, the judiciary, is so
very, very important. We've been watching court cases come down the line -- in
1973, Roe v. Wade, just declaring a woman's right to an abortion. We now know in
the aftermath of that decision that Justice Blackmun, who was the author of the
majority opinion, even has admitted that they were determined to legalize
abortion, and they just went to the Constitution to try to find an argument that
would get them where they wanted to go. And they did.

Now that was a wake-up call for Americans to
say, "Now wait a minute. There's nothing in the Constitution about abortion. By
no stretch of the imagination did the founders of this nation, and the framers
of that document, intend for anyone to be able to read those words and find a
right to kill unborn children." But judges found it.

Fast-forward 30 years -- from 1973 to 2003. In
the case
Lawrence v. Texas, the Supreme Court of the
United States of America struck down every sodomy law in this country. You see,
they found the constitutional right to sodomy. Does anyone believe that the
framers of our Constitution intended for it to be there? By no means. Well, if
it's not there, how did the court decision get there? By reading into the
Constitution what they wanted to find, which isn't there, but is constructed
there, by expanding the Constitution, by reinterpretation.

Now, of all people,
we ought to be the folks who understand that, because we as Christians have had
to understand there are people who will take the Word of God, and say it's
really not about the text -- it's about what's behind the text. We can take the
text and make it say what it doesn't mean. We have seen that pattern. And God's
people have had to learn to discern and say, "No, the text is the inerrant and
infallible Word of God. It is what God said it is, and what God revealed it to
be." And that's what must constrain our interpretations.

God bless you for
believing that and affirming that.

But now there are judges who, using the same
exercises of interpretation, find in the Constitution of the United States
what's not there. And look at how much is at risk?
In his dissent in the Lawrence v. Texas case,
Justice Antonin Scalia warned us. He said, this court is ready to legalize
same-sex marriage. It didn't do so now, but there is nothing in the logic of
this decision to prevent this Court from going there, and in short order. We've
learned that we're going to have to exercise our Christian citizenship beyond
beyond just the ballot box. We're going to have to follow this through all the
way to the nomination and confirmation of judges.

And we've learned something else. We've learned
that religious liberty really is at stake. Religious liberty is on the line here
because the courts also hold by their constitutional role a responsibility to
defend our religious liberty. But in far too many cases, judges have constrained
and violated our religious liberty.

And so now are some members of the United States
Senate. We were led in the pledge by Judge Pickering. Do you know that in his
process before the Senate Judiciary Committee, he was asked about something he
said as President of the Mississippi Baptist Convention? He said, of all things,
that "Christians ought to base their decision making on the Bible."

Now Judge
Pickering is a radical, because no Christian, until he said that, had ever
understood that before. That is normative Christianity. That's what it means to
be a believer in the Lord Jesus Christ, and to be a Christian incorporated into
the Body of Christ, and to be a faithful believer in the Church. And he was
speaking as a Christian to fellow Christians about our Christian responsibility.
But in the views of some radical secularists, that just invalidates him from
serving on the federal bench. And we, as Americans, had better hear that as a wake-up
call. Because if it's Judge Pickering now, it can be you and it can be me
tomorrow.

Now you've heard some of the protests, and you
know what they're saying against those who would argue for our understanding of
what is needed in a recovery of the judiciary. They're saying we're just
trying to speak on behalf of evangelical Christians. No, we're speaking as
evangelical Christians.

But I'm going to speak on behalf of former Alabama
Attorney General William Pryor who, when he faced the Senate Judiciary
Committee, was confronted by some who said they opposed him because of "deeply
held personal beliefs." Attorney General Pryor's a Roman Catholic. Those are his
deeply held personal beliefs. And you know what one of those beliefs is? That human
life is sacred from the moment of conception. That's why it is as if Catholics
need not apply. If it's a Roman Catholic Attorney General from Alabama today, it
could be you, or it could be yours tomorrow. This pattern of discrimination
against those who hold deep convictions about human life and the institution of
marriage must come to an end. We've got to bring it to an end. We got to do what is necessary to fulfill our
Christian citizenship to see it end.

They're saying something else about us. They're
saying that this is partisan. Well, let me say something clearly. I long for the
day when we have to choose as candidates between a pro-life Republican and a
pro-life Democrat, between a Republican who understands what marriage is and a
Democrat who understands what marriage is. Then they can compete for our vote,
because they'll stand where Americans stand; and they'll understand where we
need to stand if we're going to save this civilization, and if we're going to uphold
righteousness.

As evangelical Christians, our main concern is the citizenship
that is ours in heaven that has been purchased by our Savior. But we also
understand that we have a responsibility here on this earth, so long as we are alive,
until the Lord returns, to show God's love and to contend for God's
righteousness -- and to tell this world that through His Law, and through His
Word, God is trying to tell us something for our good, for our health, for our
holiness. And we, as Christians, need to be active in the public sphere, not
just to impose some kind of worldview or ideology, but to be salt and light, because that's not my idea
-- that's how we were commissioned by the Lord Jesus
Christ.

We need to speak as Christian citizens. What we demand is an up-or-down
vote on the floor of the Senate. It is nothing less than cowardice for a
minority in the Senate to block these people from the vote they so richly
deserve. Let's get them that vote and we will stand with the American people
with the results.